On Sat, Nov 17, 2001 at 08:10:34PM +0100, Karl Eichwalder wrote:
> Sven Neumann <sven@xxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> > If the change is correct, it should of course go into 1.2 since it's
> > a bugfix then.
>
> Yes, bugfixes should go in. Cosmetical things should not go in; instead
> of fixing a typo, say, you should provide an "overload" in en.po
> resp. en_{GB,US}.po. It isn't necessary to provide also en_AU, en_CA,
> etc. since English users in Australia are considered to use a cascading
> mechanism:
>
> LANGUAGE=en_AU:en_US
Probably only "considered to use" by people outside of Australia. :)
About 15 or 20 years ago, it would have been almost intuitively obvious
that this progression should be en_AU -> en_GB. Nowadays, there's not
really any clear fallback, since for words like color/colour, both
spellings are acceptable according to Australian dictionaries (although
the tendency still tends to be to use an 's' rather than a 'z' in words
like 'rationalise'). Thus, there is probably still slightly more
influence from en_GB than en_US in Australian English, so this fallback
seems strange, without being completely wrong.
Malcolm
--
You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say will be misquoted,
then used against you.
